Legal Opinion · Dissent

Brian Hoxie's Painting Co. v. Cato-Meridian Central School District

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 7, 1988Published

1Dissent

Green and Pine, JJ.

(dissenting). The majority, while recognizing that section 200-d of the Labor Law applies to a school district, nevertheless affirms the grant of summary judgment to defendant school district on the ground that plaintiff has failed to state a valid cause of action. We disagree. Defendant violated section 220-d of the Labor Law by failing to include in the advertised specifications for the contract a provision stating the minimum hourly rate of wage which can be paid and the minimum supplement that can be provided. It is well established that violation of a statute may…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Martin v. HerzogNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
  2. Action Electrical Contractors Co. v. GoldinNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Golden v. JosephNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
  4. E. Williamson Roofing & Sheet Metal Co. v. Town of ParishAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
  5. Varsity Transit Inc. v. SaporitaNew York Court of Appeals · 1979

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API